A/HRC/25/31 B. Expeditious proceedings 30. States should ensure that remedies for economic, social and cultural rights violations are able to provide an answer in a prompt and timely fashion.125 As the fulfilment of economic, social and cultural rights is often linked to the livelihood of rights holders, remedies require special diligence, celerity and expeditious decisions in order to be effective.126 United Nations treaty bodies and experts have made extensive reference to this requirement, stating that remedial proceedings must be timely, prompt and expeditious.127 Although there is no legal stipulation as to the appropriate length of any given administrative proceeding or judicial process, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights made clear that proceedings should not result in “unwarranted delays” in the preliminary stages of proceedings or in arriving at a final decision.128 The reasonableness and adequacy of the length of the decision must take into account the specific nature of the controversy and the specific needs of claimants, especially of those whose are most in need of an expeditious response, such as children or migrant workers facing deportation.129 31. Specific issues arise in the context of migrant workers who might return to their States of origin, voluntarily or otherwise, prior to the resolution of remedial proceedings for economic, social and cultural rights violations.130 The Committee on Migrant Workers has emphasized that States should design remedial proceedings so that victims are not barred by the length of proceedings from filing and pursuing a complaint regarding violations of their rights.131 As alluded to in paragraph 23 above, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women has indicated that the right to access justice may be affected when, upon complaint, a migrant worker loses a work permit, making it financially difficult “to remain in the country for the duration of the trial, if any.”132 In the case of migrants returned to their country of origin, States may consider entering into bilateral agreements that permit these migrants to have access to justice in the country of employment.133 C. Reasonably simple and inexpensive proceedings 32. Administrative and judicial remedies must be designed based on a principle of equity and affordability. As a consequence, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has determined that remedies must not be “unreasonably costly”.134 If any 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 CESCR, general comment No. 17 (2005), para. 18 (c) and general comment No. 20 (2009), para. 40 (discrimination); CRC, general comment No. 16 (2013), para. 30. CESCR, general comment No. 9 (1998), para. 9 and general comment No. 17 (2005), para. 18 (c); CRC, general comment No. 16 (2013), para. 31. See also European Court of Human Rights, applying the guarantee of reasonable length of judicial procedures to economic and social rights: Deumeland v. Germany, 29 May 1986; Obermeier v. Austria, 28 June 1990; Vocaturo v. Italy, 24 May 1991; Lestini v. Italy, 26 February 1992; Ruotolo v. Italy, 27 February 1992; X v. France, 31 March 1992; Salesi v. Italy, 26 February 1993; Schouten and Meldrum v. the Netherlands, 9 December 1994; Mosca v. Italy, 2 February 2000; Mennitto v. Italy, 5 October 2000; Delgado v. France, 14 November 2000. CESCR, general comment No. 9 (1998), para. 9; CMW/C/GTM/CO/1, 2011, para. 21; CRC, general comment No. 16 (2013), para. 30; A/HRC/15/31/Add.1, para. 54. CESCR, general comment No. 17 (2005), para. 52. CMW/C/GTM/CO/1, 2011, para. 21; CRC, general comment No. 16 (2013), para. 30. CMW, general comment No. 1 (2010), para. 17. Ibid., paras. 49–50. CEDAW, general recommendation No. 26 (2008), para. 21. CMW, general comment No. 1 (2010), para. 50. CESCR, general comment No. 17 (2005), para. 52. 15